B&W Advice Needed

[DJ]

I'm not sure my B&W film efforts are working right, the film seems to be very flat to me, with no real contrast. I think I must be doing something wrong. I've only just started using B&W film, so I don't have any experience to speak of and I'm hoping for a few tips from members.

Just to be clear, I don't do any processing or wet-printing myself, I don't have a dark room, and to be honest, I don't want one, I'd rather have someone else do all that messy stuff. I've been shooting Ilford FP4+ and sending it to Peak Imaging for processing. I've been happy with the results from them for my Velvia, so I just used them for the B&W too. I just mark the film for "B&W Process Only". I'm going to switch to Delta100 as soon as this box is finished, as I don't like grain and I understand the Delta100 is finer grained than the FP4+.

I've been using the same procedures for shooting with the B&W film as the Velvia, it seems to work ok on the tranny film. I've been using the correct ISO speed, compensating for reciprocity etc as I should be.

By way of example, here is a B&W shot that I've (significantly) played with :



which is what I think it ought to look like, but here is what the straight scan looks like :



and this was taken using a Lee No.25 Red filter to enhance the contrast! I realise I'm going to have to do some work to bring out the image to it's full potential, but I'm sure these should be more contrasty "out of the box" so to speak. Is this normal?

Am I doing something obviously wrong? or just expecting too much? Am I having these sheets processed incorrectly?

I'd be grateful of any help, as I'm really quite enjoying doing B&W and would like to get my working method up to scratch.

[Joanna Carter]

Hi Darren

Can I start by commenting on your use of a red filter ? This will not increase contrast unless there is a significant amount of blue/green in the image. All it does is to block these colours whilst allowing mainly red through. If your image was typical Scottish colouration then I would expect a fairly flat picture due to the lack of blue and predominance of reddy/orangey content.

FP4+ is certainly grainier than I like, which is why I would use Delta 100 if they did it in Quickload, so I usually use Fuji Acros instead, which I find very close to Delta in characteristic.

If you would like to send me the neg, I would be willing to scan it and see what I can get out of it; I could then send you the resulting Photoshop file, complete with all layers, so you could see what was needed to make it work.

[DJ]

It's not so much the digital stage I'm concerned with, I'm pretty happy with the one I created (I also used several layers combining curves, constrast masks etc to achieve a better image), and I'm content enough to sit and diddle with the scans for ages, but the offer is appreciated.

It's the physical negative that I'm worried about, I not convinced they should look like this, and I'm keen to fix whatever I'm doing wrong in the "analogue" realm so I have a better starting point. If I wanted a silver print done from this negative, I think it would be a disaster, ideally I'd like to think the negative could be used for either a silver or digital print.

Your point about the red filter is very helpful, I hadn't really considered the colour content of the image when using it, and I should. The above image wasn't the usual rusty Scottish palette, it was still green then, and there was a bit of blue tint to the sky, so I would have expected a little more contrast than I actually got.

Keep these tips coming, I'm soaking them all up!

[PAUL O]

Black and white film NEEDS to be self-processed! The key to good b&w is having total control over the whole process - from exposure to print. My advice would be:
1. Use Delta 100 - very forgiving film
2. Rate it at 100 ASA and use zone-system for exposure control. Simplified - Basically meter the darkest area you want to see full detail - in the example you show this would probably be the shadow areas under the arches on the bridge. Next meter the highlight area where you want to see full detail - try a white cloud (above background hills to the left of your example). Measure the range between these two readings: 5 stops difference will require Normal development. If the range is less than 5 stops then development will need to be increased (up to a max of 2 stops usually), if the range is greater than 5 stops then the development time will need to be decreased(usually by a max of minus 2 stops).
3. Once you've determined the development you can concentrate on the exposure for the negative
4. Meter the important shadow area (again) - under the arches. The reading you get will be Zone 5 or 18% grey. You then decrease exposure by 2 stops to move the measurement to Zone 3 (IMPORTANT SHADOW AREA). Do this by either adjusting the shutter speed or ASA setting. The adjusted reading you get now is the exposure for the scene.
5. If you use filters then you will need to include the filter factor into the calculation I would do this at the ASA setting stage and use one filter to leave the setting constant - I agree with Jo, a red is not suitable for this scene - in fact, not much use for anything
6. Try a yellow filter - or at most a light orange ... plenty for UK landscapes. With a yellow/light orange I would rate Delta 100 at about 64ASA as a start.
This may sound complicated but in practice`its not! Just plug the film speed/filter factor settings into your meter and work methodically!
7. Once film is exposed mark holder with the DEVELOPMENT, either N for Normal, N- if a decrease is required and N+ if you need to increase dev time.
8. Get yourself a CombiPlan Tank or use trays if you have a darkroom. With Delta 100 try using a bog-standard dev like Paterson FX-39. Normal development time is in the region of 10 minutes, for plus or minus development try increasing and decreasing dev time for about 15% per stop e.g. N-2 would require a decrease in time of 30%, N+2 an increase of 30% - experimentation/testing is required but once you find the correct combination for you it works every time!
A recap
1. ASA setting in meter of 64ASA (to allow for filter).
2. Meter zonal (contrast) range to calculate DEvelopment time, either N, N-1 etc. (High contrast = N- dev, low contrast = N+ dev).
3. Measure Zone 3 (important shadow area) in scene and decrease reading by 2 stops.
4. Expose at this setting.
5. mark film holder with DEV time.
6. Cross your fingers and hope for the best

[Paul Sanders]

Hi,

I shoot the majority of my images black and white and I totally agree with Paul, although he expalins the process so much better than I could. I always use a yellow filter and some times combine it with a coral grad for the sky if needed to help a bit.


Personally I prefer my negs just a tad flat then adjust the contrast on paper or in photoshop - but that's just the way I work. Good luck.

[DJ]

Ok, the zone thing makes sense, and is not that disimilar to my usual methods when working out exposure for transparency ( aside from the development malarkey ), so I'll go with the zone system for exposure methods, I'm sold on that.

However, if I start doing this development thing, I'll never stop, and I just don't have the time or space to get into it, first it's the combi-plan tank, then it's developer, then stop, fixer, hardener, thermometers, driers, etc etc etc ( I'm guessing at all this, I'm not really the darkroom type ), pretty soon I'll end up with loads more gear, and I already have too much gear and too little space to put it!

So... I've done my exposures via the Zone system, and worked out my intended development, I need to get someone to process it. Sending each sheet in to Peak with development adjustments is gonna be expensive, like £2.90 per sheet, that's gonna sting. Does anyone use and can recommend a lab who does good work and is reasonable?

[Paul Sanders]

I used Metro in London, they really aren't cheap but convenient. I think they charge around £4 per sheet, however that does focus the mind when shooting!!!! Although having just looked at the Peak site I think you are getting a bargain.

Of course what you could do is run a series of test shots through your lab under a couple of different lighting conditions.

If you do an exposure test - say white card black card and 18%grey card, take your meter reading and shoot the same setup in low contrast (cloudy) lighting, the same in a more high contrast setting. write down every part of the process exposure, filtration etc.

shoot a couple of versions of each set-up

Then send the first sheet to the lab from each set-up for normal development, then when you get them back look carefully at the contrast range and talk to the lab about what they think would improve the range of contrast on the neg. Then send the next sheets with the adjustments for development - you should get back a perfect neg. So in future you know that under cloudy conditions you might have to add 10% to the dev time, and under higher contrast conditions you may have to reduce it slighty. It is not a failsafe system but it will give a guide so that you don't waste money clip testing films every time you send things off.

Hope that makes sense

[DJ]

So, if I'm reading this right, sending the film off to be processed isn't as easy as marking it "N+1", as you need to define what "1 stop" is, as it will vary from film to film, developer to developer, and is quite subjective.

To some extent I'll be at the mercy of the processor and their expertise, in which I'll have to put some degree of trust.

[Mark Pope]

Paul O is right. I think it's worthwhile doing your own developing.
It would be very worthwhile getting a copy of Ansel Adams' book 'The Negative', which explains the zone system and what the meaning of N+, N and N- development are.

In a nutshell, you use exposure to control shadow values and exposure to control highlights.
'N' development is used for 'Normal' subject brightness ranges. N+ development means increasing your development time, which expands the tonal range of the film.
N- development means reducing development time to compress or reduce the tonal range of a negative. You can't just say 'I'll develop N+1 or N-1' without knowing what your normal development time is.
The full process is:
1. determine your personal film speed for a given film and developer combination.
2. Once you have determined your personal film speed, do some tests to determine your normal development time.
3. Take pictures to validate that these are correct. Your film speed and development times may be different, especially of you are scanning your film rather than making wet prints.

4. do tests to determine n-1 and n+1 development times. I still have to do this, as it is a bit tedious, but ultimately I know it will be worth the effort.

FWIW, I use HP5 plus at the moment and use a personal film speed of 250. I develop it in Ilford Perceptol 1+2 for 12 minutes at 24 degrees C.

Another book that's worth getting hold of is 'Elements' by Barry Thornton. Sadly, it's now out of print.

Hope that's useful.

[DJ]

I appreciate the benefits of developing yourself, I have Ansel's "Negative" book, you've all convinced me it's the best way to go, and to be honest, it's exactly the sort of thing that I'd really enjoy doing, and something that I'd get really into, working out variations and researching every little nuance and technique I could find.

And that's exactly the trouble. I'd get too involved, and I just don't have the time.

I am behind on so many projects, jobs, chores and obligations, I simply don't have time to add another to the mix. In 2006 I have managed to get out to take photos ( for myself ) exactly twice, in a whole year! I commute 150 miles a day, and get a few hours a week spare time in which to fit a multidude of tasks can you hear those violins?

In short, I need someone else to do the developing for me, or simply abandon the idea altogether. Hence seeking advice, options and recommendations from you all

[SteveH]

DJ - Why not try Polaroid Type 55? I've not used it myself but understand that the resulting negs are stunning, and at £60 for 20 exp thats got to be good value when not home processing.

As for books - Barry Thornton was working on an ebook when he died - Elements of Transition. This has been finished and can still be bought on CD - I got a copy recently but have not had time to read it properly yet - it is about the combination of film and digital processing.

Give me a while and I'll put a synopsis on the site.


Steve

[SteveH]

I've taken another look at the CD Book; it has some good advice about scanning and the use of Photoshop to manipulate monochrome, but it is only 33 pages long and it was £20. If you are an experienced Photoshop users, about half the pages would be of limited use, and the rest (especially the scanning tips) might help you improve.

To get the best from this CD I suspect you also need to read Elements and Edge of Darkness (both really good books by Barry Thornton).

The CD can be ordered here:

http://www.monochromephotography.com/


Steve